ESPN OTL Title IX Proposal to cut football scholarships

[AO54]

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:7771101
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:7774119

To give a quick summary: Football does not have a female equivalent sport, therefore, in order to comply with title IX, universities are forced to do things they might not otherwise do such as build a boathouse or carry 5 more women's basketball players who will never play. Some would like to cut 5 football scholarships so they could cut the extra women who tend not to be happy sitting on the bench.

I say cut Title IX. Discrimination in the name of ending discrimination has never made much sense to me. Women's sports have the support to stand on their own.

 

[GoAUpher]

How in the world is Title IX discriminating in the name of ending discrimination?

 

[Tim Riggins]

In order to stop discrimination against women, by creating equal opportunities as men, it discriminates against men by cutting sports or scholarships that already exist. Look at what has happened to wrestling since title 9 came about.

 

[GopherinPhilly]

The issue with Title IX was/is a lack of ingenuity among universities in finding ways of complying with it without having to create fake scholarships in the athletic department. When it first was enforced, the fight was whether it was valid. It is. The fight should have been how can we comply without creating undo burdens beyond the cost of scholarships. Having a women's team that wouldn't exist without Title IX is more than just scholly costs, it also includes coaches, admin, compliance, etc. Time to rethink compliance options and look for forward moving ideas that actually benefit the University as a whole while maintaining opportunity balance in our athletic department.

 

[GoAUpher]

In order to stop discrimination against women, by creating equal opportunities as men, it discriminates against men by cutting sports or scholarships that already exist. Look at what has happened to wrestling since title 9 came about.

I mean, I get this but at the same time without it, many schools would just go back to cutting the women's sports instead. The elephant in the room has always been and will always be football because of the large number or scholarships it takes.

Getting rid of Title IX also isn't the answer because it impacts many areas outside of sports when it comes to academic institutions. At most, interested parties need to be talking about revising how it affects athletics. Don't look to me for that though, I have no fountain of ideas when it comes to this issue.

 

[zambam]

Maybe the NCAA could pick up Lingerie football? Give the struggling league more popularity?

 

[MNBob]

The only way Minnesota complies with Title IX is to have a huge women's cross country team. They all run in races (the have some split squad meets) and they appear to be happy. Some schools cheat by having extra women who don't actually run, but I believe Minnesota complies honestly. One solution to the problem of quotas is to charge the football team with fewer scholarships. The football ream generates revenue which supports the other sports and there is no other team with anywnere close to the 85 scholarships.

 

[matt]

Maybe the NCAA could pick up Lingerie football? Give the struggling league more popularity?

Quite possibly your best post ever.

 

[Schlic Daddy]

I think the solution to this problem is to make cheerleading count towards Title IX compliance.

 

[GophersInIowa]

Title IX is now outdated. Instead of it creating opportunities for women, it's taking away opportunities for men.

 

[SJUgopher]

Title IX is now outdated. Instead of it creating opportunities for women, it's taking away opportunities for men.

Is it Title IX taking away opportunities for men, or is football? It was created in an era before there were $30 million football budgets. Football budgets have ballooned in comparison to other sports since Title IX inception. Athletic budgets use football as the primary source of funding for the rest of the sports, I'm racking my brain trying to figure out a way to take out football from Title IX or use it in some formula, but the end result of everything seems to be non-revenue and women's sports being cut.

 

[Sparlimb]

Discrimination in the name of ending discrimination has never made much sense to me. Women's sports have the support to stand on their own.

Hello? Anyone in there? How does saying athletic scholarships by an organization that receives federal money should be proportionate to the gender ratio equal "discrimination"? That's a moronic statement. Football has always been a problem with Title IX because there is no women's sport with so many scholarships. No school with football scholarships is truly in compliance with the law, but they have been given a pass due to "moving toward equity" in scholarships. Title IX has been too important in giving opportunities to women to go away. Won't happen.

 

[MNVCGUY]

The only way Minnesota complies with Title IX is to have a huge women's cross country team. One solution to the problem of quotas is to charge the football team with fewer scholarships. The football ream generates revenue which supports the other sports and there is no other team with anywnere close to the 85 scholarships.

You know we have a rowing squad right? That is the main way we are trying to comply with title IX. I wish they would keep Title IX but just take football out of the equation or as you said figure out a way to make it more of a ratio. You look at the other sports and it is easy to match them with a men's and women's equivalent, football is the one that messes everything up due to the 80 scholarships.

 

[SickAndTiredOfLosingToWI]

Title IX is merely a stale remnant of the opening salvo in the feminist gender wars that draws an arbitrary delineation (men vs. women) and then creates massive layers of state bureaucracy to suck resources out of where they would have naturally gone (athletics for men who want to be athletes) and into an artificially created place (athletics for women brainwashed by feminist propaganda into believing they should be athletes).

Note that the recipients of athletic scholarships are overwhelmingly dumb jocks and jockettes, while the smarter, less skilled but still competitive-minded students have to tough it out at the rec center on their own dime. How is this remotely fair?

For the record I think all athletic scholarships should be abolished as they are a total joke.

 

[Mulligan]

Football is also the cash cow that drives everything. Wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to reduce scholarships again. The last reduction evened things out a bit. We unfortunately screwed it up but it did help other schools. Too lazy to look it up but the last reduction was in the 90's. As much as I dislike badgers and hawkeyes, I'd bet that's one of the factors in them becoming relevant, and it's a much better league if someone can beat Ohio State and Michigan.

Another reduction might give the Gophers and teams like us a chance at a few more players. Doubt the quality and popularity would suffer although there would be an initial outcry. I know poor Bobby Bowden was one of those whining and crying about the last reduction.

Real leery of anything ESPN proposes since their first concern is themselves.

 

[Great Plains Gopher]

In general, only men's sports make money and for most schools that means basketball and football. Title IX creates an artificial equality that doesn't exist in reality, because women's sports, with basketball an exception in a few places, don't score at the box office - but then, neither do most men's sports. I'm okay with it except that it is forced, rather than voluntary. But if it was voluntary, the football factories would ignore it and concentrate on the big revenue sport. It has enormously helped women's sports in the U.S. in terms of Olympic and other international competition. I'm glad for that.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

Sports which are generating enough revenue to cover their own budgets should be exempted from Title IX. If the sports are paying for themselves, then the University is not giving the athletes opportunities, they are earning their own opportunities. The rule should be that there are equal numbers of male and female scholarships in non-revenue sports, because those are the athletes that the U is supporting financially.

 

[Goldmember]

Hello? Anyone in there? How does saying athletic scholarships by an organization that receives federal money should be proportionate to the gender ratio equal "discrimination"? That's a moronic statement. Football has always been a problem with Title IX because there is no women's sport with so many scholarships. No school with football scholarships is truly in compliance with the law, but they have been given a pass due to "moving toward equity" in scholarships. Title IX has been too important in giving opportunities to women to go away. Won't happen.

This whole thread reads like something from 15years ago. Thats when the debate over the validity of Title IX took place. The results are in. Regardless of intentions, it has it been a disaster. And everyone who matters knows this. That's why it's even beginning to be debated all over again.

Title IX was part of The War on Boys which has been remarkably effective. The result: 60/40 female to male ratios are common on college campuses. Male students are less likely to enroll, more likely to drop-out. Those that stick around college report being only a fraction as engaged in the college community as their female counterparts. Worse yet is that this is a trend that is picking up steam. Many think we will end-up with ratios closer to 80/20 before conditions for boys before conditions can improve, perhaps in a generation when the problem is staring policymakers in the face. By then, we will certainly have a lost generation, and all that comes with it.

Is Title IX solely responsible? Of course not. But it was one battle in the war. And why, exactly, was this war waged? Apparently some old hippies who had daughters were concerned about how it sucked to be a woman in the 50's. And, as is often the case, they pationately looked for solutions to a problem that society was already well on it's way to correcting. All that was left for the old hippies to do was kick some boys in the nuts. And that's exactly what they did. Sports that boys cared passionately about were cut at schools across the country. Meanwhile, sports that girls could barely be persuaded into being marginally interested in were added.

Apparently this is what passes for equality.

 

[zambam]

Wait, are you saying Title IX is the reason there are more girls at college than guys? Seriously? Guys dropping out has to do with women getting as many athletic scholarships as men? Men aren't engaged in their school as women because women get as many athletic scholarships as men? Absolutely ridiculous.

 

[To Be Named Later]

Wait, are you saying Title IX is the reason there are more girls at college than guys? Seriously? Guys dropping out has to do with women getting as many athletic scholarships as men? Men aren't engaged in their school as women because women get as many athletic scholarships as men? Absolutely ridiculous.

This. There's nothing more ridiculous than hearing the privileged whine about discrimination.

 

[supadupafly]

Title IX is merely a stale remnant of the opening salvo in the feminist gender wars that draws an arbitrary delineation (men vs. women) and then creates massive layers of state bureaucracy to suck resources out of where they would have naturally gone (athletics for men who want to be athletes) and into an artificially created place (athletics for women brainwashed by feminist propaganda into believing they should be athletes).

Note that the recipients of athletic scholarships are overwhelmingly dumb jocks and jockettes, while the smarter, less skilled but still competitive-minded students have to tough it out at the rec center on their own dime. How is this remotely fair?

For the record I think all athletic scholarships should be abolished as they are a total joke.

ummm, actually student-athletes generally have a higher graduation rate than the general non-athlete student population at universities. but thanks for playing. box.

 

[zambam]

ummm, actually student-athletes generally have a higher graduation rate than the general non-athlete student population at universities. but thanks for playing. box.

Student athletes also get A LOT more help with extra tutoring and the like. Also many student athletes don't have to worry about not being able to pay for their schooling and having to drop out because of it.

 

[supadupafly]

Student athletes also get A LOT more help with extra tutoring and the like. Also many student athletes don't have to worry about not being able to pay for their schooling and having to drop out because of it.

sounds like a straw man argument to me. you are trying to tell me non-athletes don't have access to study halls, study groups, tutoring, etc? either way, the point you are attempting to make is completely contrary to the initial point the guy was trying to make that i responded to. which was him trying to claim that student-athletes graduate at a lower rate than than non-athletes. and that is just not the case.

 

[disco]

I wish they would keep Title IX but just take football out of the equation...

This.

 

[station19]

Sports which are generating enough revenue to cover their own budgets should be exempted from Title IX. If the sports are paying for themselves, then the University is not giving the athletes opportunities, they are earning their own opportunities. The rule should be that there are equal numbers of male and female scholarships in non-revenue sports, because those are the athletes that the U is supporting financially.

+19

One of the problems however, would be some interesting accounting shenanigans.

 

[RoyalGopher]

For the record I think all athletic scholarships should be abolished as they are a total joke.

You are kidding, right? The whole purpose of the NCAA is to have the athletes of the schools to continue their studies while continuing their career or passion as an athlete.

 

[SickAndTiredOfLosingToWI]

ummm, actually student-athletes generally have a higher graduation rate than the general non-athlete student population at universities. but thanks for playing. box.

graduation rate != intelligence. Thx for playing.

You are kidding, right? The whole purpose of the NCAA is to have the athletes of the schools to continue their studies while continuing their career or passion as an athlete.

Fascinating, tell us more.

 

[Killjoy]

How in the world is Title IX discriminating in the name of ending discrimination?

Anytime you set up a quota system you are setting up a system that is going to discriminate on some basis. That is just reality. There are always unattended consequences whatever we do.

P.S. - The key is to try to minimize them or their impact. I get the feeling from reading the comments above that everybody doen't seem to realize that is what much of the conversation is about.

 

[supadupafly]

graduation rate != intelligence. Thx for playing.


Fascinating, tell us more.

well, how would you define it then, smart guy? in general student-athletes have a higher graduation rate than non-athletes at universities. why is that their fault and why are you angry at them about it? in the scenario you are laying out, you are making blanket statements about athletes being complete idiots with absolutely no factual evidence or statistics to back that up. that, my friend, is simply called an opinion. not fact.

btw - i have met some not-so-intelligent non-athletes on several college campuses too. it goes both ways.

might be time to check yourself on this little debate.

 

[Iceland12]

well, how would you define it then, smart guy? in general student-athletes have a higher graduation rate than non-athletes at universities. what is that their fault and why are you angry at them about it? in the scenario you are laying out, you are making blanket statements about athletes being complete idiots with absolutely no factual evidence or statistics to back that up. that, my friend, is simply called an opinion. not fact.

btw - i have met some not-so-intelligent non-athletes on several college campuses too. it goes both ways.

That's the interesting part isn't it? Let's say the people who want University sports to only be Minor Leagues for the Pros win. They kill all the Non-Revenue Mens programs and all the Women's programs. That would leave just Football, Basketball, Men's Hockey in a handful of schools and maybe Baseball down South and Volleyball out West.

How many schools would still claim the athletes having higher Graduation rates?